Atheism

It's good to see that you can't even see how moronic you are. Or maybe you just like to troll. I'm beginning to think it is the latter. If not you are just an simple moron.

That won't do at all Krumpie. Calling the other side "moronic" is not an argument I'm afraid. If it was everybody would win every argument they ever had. The resulting solipsism would be so intense that it would burn the brain.

It isn't about winning or losing an argument. I couldn't care any less about winning an argument. The over all point is to instill the idea of actually questioning the entire paradigm of assumed historical facts. It is funny how people just immediately shut off that none of the things I bring up have any validity. They just immediately assume the historical data that is so widely spouted is 100% accurate. That it doesn't need to be checked. I say nonsense.

So when a person challenges this concept and attempts to shut if off with more nonsense there is nothing left to do. You can't reason with a person who will refuse to actually investigate anything and just blindly accept what ever is offered to them. Historical or modern day people who won't check or investigate themselves are morons. They need be reminded of it sometimes.

You're talking about people as you imagine them to be. You place your sitting duck on your porch rail so you can't miss it.

Maybe people shut off from you out of sheer exhaustion or from realising the fruitlessness of discussing anything with you.

yeah I understand that because people are lazy and just accept what the rest of the group accepts. They don't care about truths. They are fine with blindly accepting the status quo.

I am in no way accusing all christians, not even creationist christians, of subscribing to this attitude, but this book did sell quite well in the homeschooling sector - sheeit.

I thought everybody subscribed to that. It's not an attitude.

It's natural to be lazy. And lazy people generally do accept what the rest of the group accepts. The "rest of the group" is a concept containing the dead and the long experience of the dead. Jumping Jack Flash is neurotic from an evolutionary point of view.

There's your sitting duck.

What are the labour saving devices we men have invented and mass produced for if it is not to cater for laziness? We no longer have to wind up our car windows or get up off the sofa to change the channel on the TV,

Romans, and others, whipped slaves to make them work. We use subtler methods which are so effective that we have workaholics and demand that politicians find us work.

What's your attitude to swots and rate busters?

Oh, good lord... *facepalm*


(The image and the thought behind that book, I mean.)

What do you mean?

Oh, I dunno. The willful stupidity being shoved mercilessly into the minds of young people, I guess.

But you are defining what "willful stupidity" is. And "shoved". And "mercilessly".

What's your objection to the page of the book hh posted? It served as a warning about people who use the word "electricity" as if they know what it is and pose as being scientific when they are not. There are many people who use expressions such as "quantum theory" or "physotomous" dropped casually in conversation, as if they are so simple they need no explanation, taking advantage of the listener not wishing to seem stupid by asking what they mean as they would be if the thing was simple.

If you ever read Nick Leeson's book Rogue Trader you will see that technique employed to break a high status bank. And deliberately. There are people running around not far from here who use certain buzzy scientific expressions to bolster their intellectual credentials and they don't know their arse from their elbow. Leeson's superiors, a lady particularly, couldn't admit that they didn't understand his memo appealing for another large tranche of dough. To admit that would be mortifying for a superior. Especially a lady. So he got the extended credit he had asked for in order to bet his way out of trouble.

After all, a buzzy scientific expression is only buzzy because nobody knows what it means. If everybody knows what it means it has no buzz. It is common in that case and thus no cachet adheres to it.

The young lady in the picture is using the dryer to help make herself look pretty and not worry about how the process is effected. Just as we all do many times a day when we switch lights on and adjust thermostats in greenhouse heaters without it ever entering our heads what electricity is.

The ladies of our evolution washed the clothes on the rocks beside the river without a thought for how the rock was formed or where the water was coming from. Such ideas are inimical to gossiping and women gossiping is a force to be reckoned with. So one can easily see that men, or some men, might try to reduce women gossiping by having them focus their minds on more serious issues.

As an exercise in how to choose a photograph to match the text on the page, whilst remaining within the bounds of Christian decency, it was most excellent.

I don't see your objection and a series of assertions, no matter how long, does not support it.

So, where does that leave theism if it comes down to logic?



The atheist opponents of porn are being swept aside along with the theist opponents of porn. Theists enjoy porn. Theists are involved in the propagation of porn from its production and distribution to its consumption. It comes down to the logic of supply and demand. Theism, in and of itself, is irrrelevant with regard to the propagation of porn.

Theism is too broad a term for discussion on this subject to be fruitful. The position of the Church is perfectly clear.



I know.

Which church? let me guess, "your church? Do you think that it is the only one in the world? If not do you think that they all think as clear as you do?

I said that the position of the Church is perfectly clear on pornography. It is contained in Article 2354 of the Official Catechism. If you have another church offering an alternative say which it is and I will look it up and consider it.

I can't imagine why you bring me into it. I am not asking for your views on the matter if I ask you what the atheist position is. What is the atheist position on pornography?

I do not know but if I were to make atheism a religion I would elect this blond to be one of the head speakers.

I am not sure if her porn is hard enough for you because from what I understand from my own country is that most porn is downloaded from what we call the bible belt over here.

I remain amazed how you all go on and on and on and on and on, in LittleK's serious thread for atheists, adding thousands of posts not having a thing to do with the atheist conversation.

rudeness multiplied

Spendius what do you think about the nun who broke into our nuclear plant?

This is silly. I wasn't talking about people who want to make their lives filled with gadgets so they don't have to do any work.

I am referring to the laziness dealing with fact checking. People just go with the status quo because they don't want to investigate anything on their own. They will just assume everything is accurate and then talk about it as if they know what they are talking about.

Labor laziness is one thing but laziness dealing with knowledge or the use of that knowledge is completely different.